Sen. Barack Obama, speaking at a rally in Leesburg, Va., is the first major-party nominee to forgo federal funds since the inception of the public-financing system in 1976. He has raised more than $600 million. (Jacquelyn Martin/AP)
A new era for campaign finance
Obama’s fundraising record could signal the end of public funding for major candidates.
By Linda Feldmann | Staff writer/ October 23, 2008 edition
Reporter Linda Feldmann discusses Sen. Barack Obama's prodigious campaign fundraising so far.
Washington
Has the 2008 election signaled the end of public financing for presidential campaigns?
In some ways, yes. Barack Obama, the first major-party nominee to forgo federal funds since the advent of the system in 1976, has raised more money than even his own campaign thought imaginable. The Democratic nominee’s $150 million haul in September alone dwarfs the $84.1 million total that Republican John McCain can deploy for the entire general election season in his public grant. Overall, Senator Obama has raised more than $600 million, nearly twice what Senator McCain has. Party money has supplemented both campaigns’ efforts, but not enough for McCain to keep up with Obama.
“The public system has been dying over time,” says Thomas Mann, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution.
Certainly, Mr. Mann says, the first part – the use of public funds in the primaries by the top-tier candidates – has been dead for some time. In 2000, George W. Bush started the trend by opting out of public primary money. In 2004, neither eventual nominee took the grant.
Now, Obama has shown how to rake in the cash all the way to Election Day, in both small and large increments, with the maximum donation set by law at $2,300 per donor. Half of Obama’s $600 million-plus haul so far has come in donations of $200 or less, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics.
“I think that absent reform, the only role the public funding system will have is to be a funder of last resort for candidates who have difficulty raising money,” says Anthony Corrado, a campaign finance expert at Colby College in Waterville, Maine.
He notes that public funds kept afloat the presidential hopes of John Edwards, Christopher Dodd, and Joseph Biden, at least in the early going of primary season.
In the future, any candidate who opts for public financing will be signaling that he or she is a second-tier candidate hoping to catch fire with a little help from Uncle Sam.
“Future candidates are going to be looking to emulate the Obama experience,” says Mr. Corrado. “But it’s not necessarily the case that he is going to be the model for most candidates.”
This election cycle has been unusual: It has been highly competitive, with wide-open fields in both parties from Day 1, spurring enormous voter interest. Obama’s historic run, as the first viable African-American candidate, gave his candidacy cachet. And the grass-roots nature of his campaign, combined with the reach of e-mail and Web-based social networks, has fueled the giving.
Some longtime watchers of campaign finance are delighted by the massive sums that have poured into the candidates’ coffers, particularly the small donations.
“It’s a sign of health,” says Mann. “If anything, I believe this time what we are seeing is that money raised is an indicator of political strength, not a source of it.”
All told, the 2008 contest for both the White House and Congress will be the most expensive in history, clocking at a projected $5.3 billion, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. The presidential candidates, who have raised more than $1.5 billion since January 2007, are on track to double the fundraising achieved in 2004 and triple that of 2000.
But other advocates of campaign finance reform worry about the ways some high rollers are able to exert their influence by donating to alternate party funds and bundling other donors’ checks.
The group Democracy 21 notes that Obama has 324 supporters bundling $100,000 or more in donations, and 47 people bundling $500,000 or more. The concern is that these bundlers will enjoy unfair access to an Obama administration, if the Illinois senator is elected.
Calls for a revamped public finance system, which could include a matching program to leverage private donations, are unlikely to receive priority when the new administration takes office. With the economy in decline and the nation at war, reform advocates will be hard put to get the issue high on the public agenda – and equally hard put to win additional funding for politicians’ campaigns.
“For this to even have a prospect, you’re going to need significant Democratic strength in the Senate and a willingness to follow with presidential support,” says Corrado.
If Obama wins, having ridden to the White House on a wave of privately raised money, he may have a hard time arguing that public financing is still the way to go.
Comments
2. newerror | 10.23.08
yes, a new error by obama….to start a trend of wasteful election donation and spending. And at the same time, take in hundreds of million of
money from special interest, rich people.
Really, does your everyday donation comes up to 650mil? no…
he is the rich guy’s donation target to buy him out.
3. Doug | 10.23.08
Public financing should be required, otherwise one can simply buy the election like we are seeing now. Limit the money they can spend and they will have to run on qualifications not how many ads they can run. Or how wealthy the backers are.
4. sgi | 10.23.08
Yes, Obama’s campaign financing success does signal a new era, but not the one you think. Please read Politico’s latest post on this issue and the commentary. Dare we hope you cover this story?
5. Lynn | 10.23.08
What we ought to do is ban both public and private money for all political campaigns. In addition, an individual should not be able to use their personal wealth to run for public office. Take the money out of it completely. What we need to do then is simply make the public owned airwaves available for several hours a week for the candidates to use. As voters we just tune in every night for an hour or so and hear the candidates themselves give speeches, etc. Based on that we can gain the knowledge about them to cast a knowledgable vote. No need for these people to be flying all over the country holding rallies or have expensive campaign staffs, etc. — it is all just a waste of money.
6. NOBAMA | 10.23.08
I’m sure quite a bit of Obama’s money has come from foreign countries that hate America. No one randomly gets money donations of thousands of dollars with names like “askldf;sdfj”. I’m also sure a ton of it came from all of these bank CEO’s who robbed the country.
7. Uncle Buck | 10.23.08
Yep, definitely grass-roots fund raising, with the under $200 donations coming from Mr. “Do Good”, Mr. “A. Citizen” and Mr. “Michael Mouse” traceable back to a handful of overseas credit card numbers. Yessir, we’ve been shown the way to fund-raise.
8. Monique | 10.23.08
The fact that the Obama campaign had the foresight to not take the public financing makes him seem more savvy when it comes to money. That is exactly what the country needs. Senator McCain seems behind the times and strange for complaining that Senator Obama decided to opt out of a bad financing deal. Seems like Senator McCain is complaining because he didn’t think of that idea. Like my grandmother would say “Hindsight is 20/20″.
9. Dave in Ma. | 10.23.08
McSame had the same opportunity as Obama and opted to stay with public financing.
Go Obama/Biden’08
11. Michael | 10.23.08
So democracy 21 thinks that a group of 68 people who raised a total of less than .01% his campaign funds will have unfair access to the White house? What kind of logic are they using exactly?
Obama has raised the MAJORITY of his funds through donations of less than $200 from private donors who like myself have personally given their hard earned cash to a candidate who might actually represent the people as a whole. This is campaign finance as it should be.
If a candidate cannot raise money from the ground up, chances are the candidates policies do not reflect the needs of his/her prospective constituents and therefore does not deserve financing. We should do away with public financing altogether and this way the people will always HAVE to answer to his/her constituents.
12. Michae | 10.23.08
Weird… you posted my comment for a minute and then removed it… why? Is it hard for the CSM to allow conflicting opinions? Would you rather I have said that Obama is a muslim? We live in strange times.
- Suppressed opinion
13. lightnin | 10.23.08
Here’s a reason why Obumma SHOULDN’T win! Obama wants to make YOU a criminal if you try to PROTECT yourself and your family from attackers in your own home! He’s voted to do just that! Cut & paste this into your browser:
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/10/22/nra-ad-imagine/
Then make an INFORMED decision!
14. pvs | 10.23.08
It really is too bad McCain did not get on that band wagon– i bet he has a WHOLE BUNCH of rich friends that would have out spent Obama!!!
15. Julie Geltz | 10.23.08
You may think Obama’s money came from strange overseas credit cards, but everyone I know has donated to Mr. Obama’s campaign. And I am the big spender - $100. We supported him cause he seems like a bright, insightful problem solver who may actually care about people. What a radical change from the opposition with their hate mongering. Let’s see now, Obama is a baby killing socialist terrorist. Oh my, what ever happened to “love one another”? Policy disagreements I can stomach. Outright lies by the power hungry! How pathetic.
16. alice | 10.23.08
‘Public’ means just that. Individual donors like me getting involved in politics for the first time and funding our prefered candidate. I think the donors to the Obama campaign have done a marvellous job.
17. LALynn | 10.23.08
I have to disagree with those who doubt where Obama’s donations came from. I have personally sent 3 donations ranging from $50 to $100, and I know at least 20 other people who have done the same. Each of those people know plenty of people who have sent in that type of support, and this is just in Southern California.
The grassroots support for Obama is spread far and wide in this country and eclipses the grassroots support that won the election for Bill Clinton.
18. jack | 10.23.08
To comment # 6. NOBAMA, You know that NO foreign money was raised by Obama nor donated to his campaign. What gets your goat is that Republicans can no longer use Rove like tactics to spread hate,lies and dissension to divide and conquer the voters. Voters want a canidate who will answer questions and tell you what he believes he can do. Not a person who can slime the opponet with nasty lies and hopes some of these will raise doubts. That person has not given voters hope, he has caused them to loose faith in the integrity of that individual. Don’t believe me? Just ask Rep. M. Bachmann. Trying to spread lies and hate may have just cost her a seat in the House.
Voters don’t want this type of campaign.
19. Mary Porter | 10.23.08
Don’t worry, Uncle Buck, we millions of Obama donors are real people (and real Americans). This election isn’t what killed the public financing option. Public financing already wasn’t “working” in the 2004 election; we Democrats watched the outpouring of slimy money for the lying Swift-Boat campaign in helpless horror. Where was your outrage then?
What is being done with our contributions isn’t wasteful at all. We are running a ground campaign in 50 states, trying to heal the division and distrust that have ripped our nation apart under the politics of division. Organizers are not only reaching out to their own communities, but to each other’s communities. We aren’t red states and blue states anymore: this is the United States of America.
20. Ben | 10.23.08
Obama has exbited his ability to bring difference group of people from difference background, white, black, Asian, hispanics,as a matter of fact human race together. He has shown his ability to run one of the most effective, well organized political campaign of our time. He has brought innovation to electorate campaign. I hope he wins, we need a good government not run by lobbies and spacial interest. Republican or democrats we all feeling the pain of bad governance.
21. sgi | 10.23.08
In my earlier post, I should have said “Power Line” not “Politico”. My apologies.
I highly recommend that everyone read the post and the comments called “Who is John Galt” posted on October 23.
22. Pat | 10.23.08
Ben, I agree whole-heartedly. Each candidate chose their type of funding, and may I add the key word here is chose…that would be: Having the right to do so. People are making it sound as though it’s against the law for me to send Obama $100 couple with millions of other concerned Americans? Why? I’m sure if all the Joe The Plumbers out there wanted to send John $100 today, he sure could use it to his avail. Only problem is, he didn’t chose to do so. Public financing is available for Democratic or Republican candidates for President of the United States during the election campaigns, during both the primaries and the general election. Eligibility requirements must be fulfilled in order to qualify for public funding, and those that do accept public funding are subject to spending limits. It’s really that simple, doesn’t require rocket science, nor is there anything sinister about it. The problem is what?
Obama has had overwhelming support and it’s blowing the Rights’ minds. Let us not covet thy neighbor. Now that’s breaking a commandment!
23. Pat | 10.23.08
Public financing is an option for Democratic or Republican candidates for President during both the primaries and the general election. It’s really that simple, doesn’t require rocket science, nor is there anything sinister about it. Much to McCain’s dismay, Obama has had overwhelming support and it’s blowing the his mind. “Let us not covet thy neighbor.” Isn’t that considered breaking the law?
24. Trinity | 10.23.08
Ben, you’re right on. Public financing is an option for Democratic or Republican candidates for President during both the primaries and the general election. It’s really that simple, doesn’t require rocket science, nor is there anything sinister about it. Much to McCain’s dismay, he chose not to do so, and, Obama has had overwhelming support. This is just blowing the Rights’ mind. Please, Let us not “covet thy neighbor.” That’s breaking a very old law.
25. Ruth | 10.23.08
Power Line is a blog which boils down to assertions without anything to back them up. Fact: The Republican National Committee had Obama’s campaign funds audited, remember? They thought they caught him receiving funds from Palestinians, only to find out that it was an order for nothing but T-shirts. Though they had high hopes of financing fraud, they found absolutely NOTHING to be illegal. Believe me, YOU WOULD BE READING IT ON THE FRONT OF EVERY NEWSPAPER IN AMERICA. The sad truth for John is simply this: People have donated to Obama with such enthusiasm, it’s really difficult for them to assimilate it all, so they look for fraud. How very sad that senses have been dulled to this degree.
26. Morris | 10.24.08
“If anything, I believe this time what we are seeing is that money raised is an indicator of political strength, not a source of it.”
27. tyou | 10.24.08
Can you imagine what Obam could have done with that money,it could have bailed us out of the mortgage crisis.
29. Chris | 10.24.08
quote poster”It really is too bad McCain did not get on that band wagon– i bet he has a WHOLE BUNCH of rich friends that would have out spent Obama!!!”
Apparently even his freinds don’t like him.LOL
Its way past time that Government sets limits on spending obscene sums on this obscene circus.
Most democracies do and command that free equal airtime is given to each prospect.
30. Chris | 10.24.08
quote poster”It really is too bad McCain did not get on that band wagon– i bet he has a WHOLE BUNCH of rich friends that would have out spent Obama!!!”
Apparently even his friends don’t like him.LOL
Its way past time that Government sets limits on spending obscene sums on this obscene circus.
Most democracies do and command that free equal airtime is given to each prospect.
31. Mary Rene | 10.24.08
All of the little people still have that $8 for an Obama sign tucked away. Even the rich people have lost up to half of their protfolios under the Bush admnistration. Nobody will forgive or forget. I wonder if the new HOOVERVILLEs will have Wi-Fi?
32. AZ_JOE | 10.25.08
The major issue is that Obama said he was a “new kind of politician” and thus the “Change” mantra. He was the one that originally agreed with McCain to take public financing during this election. He just went back on his word. One of Obama’s claim’s to fame is his work on campaign finance reform. Talk is cheap, and he has tons of money to but a lot of cheap talk. Actions speak louder than words.
This guy is so beholden to his big money donors. If you think he is going to work for the middle class, just wait. If we thought gas got expensive, with the governmental spending we are about to see, our lives are about to get a whole lot more expensive. Obama went back on his word to take public funds, just like he will go back on his word about his tax plan.
#25 Ruth - I disagree with your assertion that if Obama had dirty campaign money we would read it on every newspaper in the land. He could walk into a bank and rob it in broad daylight and the mainstream media would find a way to spin it in his favor. Did they make any story about his reversing his commitment about public financing? No. If McCain had done that, the media would have been on him everyday with some telethon-like monitor for his funds and sought to discredit him as politics as usual.
34. Rose | 10.25.08
How to do consider this buying the election? He raised his own money for advertising to get his message out. McCain is getting his message out too, but really it’s the voters responsibility to educate themselves and not vote based on only ad ad or two that they see. If that’s how they do it then shame on them.
Go Obama!
35. Eric Chandler | 10.25.08
I haven’t decided yet, however, the anti-Mr. Obama crowd appears to be ridiculing him for running a very capitalist style campaign (at least ,as capitalistic as it can get donation wise), those millions of dollars get funneled back into the economy almost as soon as it get’s donated, that’s 600 million dollars back into the economy compared to Mr. McCains 350 million dollars (which was “ours” to begin with). Republicans can sit back and feel good that they didn’t help Mr. Obama, but every Democrat that donated to Mr. Obama’s campaign (and those that didn’t) has to acknowledge that they are helping to fund Mr. Obama’s opponent also.
It seems that (assuming the posters that are ridiculing Mr. Obama are Republican) the Republicans posting are overwhelmingly supporting some kind of government controlled finance system, which in most circles = socialism…not a traditionally Republican mantra.
36. Mike | 10.25.08
Its pretty simple arithmetic. Millions of people, like me, who donated simple amounts of 25 dollars, repeatedly to the Obama campaign.
Whenever we saw McCain or Palin spouting lies, we donated. Its simple arithmetic.
37. McCain is a Hero | 10.25.08
I doubt McCain shares any of the nasty, ill-informed, ignorant sounding opinions expressed on this “blog.” I dare say he likely agress with the author of the article.
I think McCain is a gentleman and a true American hero. I think he will win or lose quite graciously.
I also think Obama shares much of the same positive characteristics as McCain.
If I thought McCain would “clean house” he’d have my vote, but I’m sorely afraid he would be little more than a puppet of the RNC.
Divisive politics don’t look good on any of us, but I have to say my former party hasn’t looked very good for a very long time.
38. Magz | 10.26.08
Who knows where Obama’s funds came from? Clearly the smaller amounts are coming from Americans who should be hanging onto their money during these times and not throwing it at literally a complete stranger pretending to be a NEW GOD. The vast amount might give one cause to pause, and ponder,….Did the LARGE amounts come from outside the U.S.A.? Where from? And in exchange for what in the future? Hmmmm……..Selling our Country down the river? Maybe? I think I’ll Wikipedia the word “Bribe”….I want to understand the absolute defintion….Goodbye America, I’ll miss you….
39. Robinson | 10.26.08
The manner in which Obama managed his campaign is the way he will manage the country; among other things, peacefully, productively, and inclusively. Besides, he has demonstrated the capacity to manage a large complex corporate entity with equanimity. For two years, there have been no reported in-fighting in his camp, he won a hard fought nomination and currently doing well in the polls. And on the issue of campaign financing, he stimulated and motivate millions of people to finance his campaign. Donating to his campaign was like buying equity participation in this business. People who bought shares (donated) believed they would earn higher returns from his Presidency than McCain’s. I imagine this is the way a free-enterprise economy market works and the way to go rather than receiving government grant to run campaigns. Any funding limitations should be related to reducing individual maximum.
40. David A. | 10.26.08
Notwithstanding the persons here who say that they personally donated to the Obama campaign, it still does not mean that someone could be donating illegally.
I can go into a shop and buy some beer legally, as I am over the required age, but that doesn’t mean that they aren’t selling beer to underage minors.
Is their proof of wrong-doing? No, for their is no investigation.
But, given that half of the donations are under $200 and that none of these donations are required to be tracked by the FEC and given that it is is a fact that the Obama campaign will take donations from credit cards that do not match the given information, how can anyone be sure that all the donations are valid?
It would seem that if the Obama campaign didn’t want this contorversy, they would have the same verification system set up as that of Amazon.com. Or even the McCain campaign.
It may very well be that most of these transactions are valid. I have no doubt that some are fraudulent.
And many, many more can be fraudulent.
All they had to do was keep the verification in place that required entering the correct name on the card, the correct address, the code in the back, and so on.
But, they didn’t.
Why?
Even if you support Obama, you have to wonder why they did this?
Why invite fraud.
This should be very disconcerting to all.
And who is to say that none of this money is coming from overseas?
Or non-citizens here.
The truth is an Obama supporter cannot say that this isn’t the case.
It’s like a blind man checking IDs at 7/11.
41. Mike | 10.26.08
Just another Big Boys Club…reminds me of the college frat boys..Just looking out for themselves.Politics suck. Bottom line it dosent matter whos in office, its the same garbage every term. Rich get richer..poor get poorer.
42. dom | 10.26.08
Campaign spending. Spend, spend, spend — then spend some more!
Obama supporters sending him a little here a little there along the way, and actually proud of it, are like people you see dropping fives, tens, and even twenties on lottery tickets each week at the grocery store. Outside Obamaworld, $5 saved each week is $260 end of year. $10 saved each week — $520 end of year. $20 saved each week by not buying lottery tickets or donating to the Obama campaign — $1,040 end of year.
In Obamaworld $260, $520, even $1,040, so long as it doesn’t drop into the lap at one time via a government check — meh, chicken feed. Just like $18 billion not spent on earmarks — meh, chicken feed. But if everyone happily has mo money at the end of each year, dag nab it, how will politicians like Obama make the case for taking and spreading the wealth?
So charlatan Obama rakes in all those fives, tens, and twenties from his supporters then SPENDS it on advertising to try and convince the rest of us that an additional 3% in rich folk taxes will make everything allright. Makes sense to Obama supporters. Sounds like a double case of eating the seed corn to the rest of us.
The more Obama spends campaigning, the more convinced I am McCain/Palin, however arguably flawed, is the right choice in November.
44. Robert | 10.26.08
Most would agree that Obama seems bright and educated. He can present himself well and seems to be a great speaker. However, he does not have right kind of leadership and visions that will lead our country in the right directions.
45. S. Sandlin | 10.26.08
Come on. Corporate is as corporate does and both candidates are thus owned. The American people? We don’t even own our country any more. I want Obama to win but doubt we’ll ever have that real, unadulterated democracy we long for any time soon.
46. Jack A | 10.26.08
This may sound stupid, becoz, I m OBAMA supporter and have donated money to his campaign but that doesnt mean that it is right or correct to opt out of public financing. Bush had an advantage in 2000 & 2004 with kind of money raised and spent. He was spectacular in grass roots private fund raising and spending. As a democrat we critized the riduculous campaign spending in those elections. Now we are planning to do the same. If we want to talk about Hindsight 20/20, where was ours then and now. When was our hindsight correct. If we have an advantage, we talk about it as others foolishness. If we dont have an advantage, we talk about others taking this riduclous advantages. In short we do not want to solve the problem nor talk about consequences. As long as we keep thinking, that we got want we want, atleast this time, lets keep our mouth shut. This makes me feel that we are fighting for our just short term advantage not for what is right or wrong. Ppl even stopped thinking that there is something called right or wrong. We began our thinking in terms of lesser evil or in terms of our own advantage. A candidate who can outright lie, even in campaign and can kill the system of public financing and cannot even talk about it. Its foolish. Do no think of this issue as your or my candidates issue. Think of it as systems issue. Then you will know or can comment on what is right or wrong. Problem is not about who is better candidate or who raised more money. It is about the system. If a system is failing try to keep it alive or modify to make it survive. Killing the system is to no ones advantage. Never try to solve a problem only in its terminal stages. Address the problems at its roots.
47. Joyce | 10.27.08
To #6-Nobama - go read about fund raising. I am one of those providing 25.00 here and 50.00 there through a credit card that is legit. And even a donation that I cannot write off on my taxes! Hey, who knew that we actually have someone running that we can believe in!
48. Bob | 10.27.08
Obama promised to take public financing then opted out. This shows a lack of intregruity just to win. I wonder what type of President he will be??
49. Todd | 11.01.08
Obama has raised 600,000,000 dollars from people like you and me. Suddenly millions of people are reengaged in government, interested and get this… optimistic! We are buying our government back here… Obama owes US now, not Exxon-Mobile, Verizon or JP Morgan Chase! We will hand him a mandate to carry out OUR priorities and to fix OUR system. He is about to prove that collectively we still do control our government.
50. Obams | 11.10.08
Now what does #6-Nobama have to say? i’m sure that he thinks some aliens or immigrants voted for Obama or more, they sent their votes by email… lol
You are pathetic!!! if there is problem with obama’s skin, i mean u can leave the country…
Let’s talk seriously here, and put all your “values” away. Try to think of the country as ONE nation. And see how the rest of the world reacted… From Canada to Australia, from Africa to Europ…
Look how The PRESIDENT ELECTED BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA units people all over the world.
My friend, even McCain, saw that. So i think it’s time to stop talking crazy. AMERICA CHOOSE!
PS. I donated $500, a major part of my paicheck and i’m proud of it!!!
Trackbacks/Pingbacks
Leave a Comment
We do not publish all comments, and we do not publish comments immediately. The comments feature is a forum to discuss the ideas in our stories. Constructive debate - even pointed disagreement - is welcome, but personal attacks on other commenters are not, and will not be published.
Tip: Do not write a novel. Keep it short. We will not publish lengthy comments. Come up with your own statements. This is not a place to cut and paste an email you received. If we recognize it as such, we won't post it.
Please do not post any comments that are commercial in nature or that violate copyrights.
Finally, we will not publish any comments that we regard as obscene, defamatory, or intended to incite violence.
1. jjppvv | 10.23.08
talk about buying an election! I thought campaign finance reform was supposed to protect the voting system in the country - looks like it back-fired